Vera Vratuša(-Žunjić)

FACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY

Belgrade

1998ICb “Participatory Research and Obstacles to its Implementation in Former European ‘Real- Socialist’ Societies” - The 9th Conference of the International Association for the Economics of Participation, Bristol, UK, June 26th-28th1998  Programme & Abstracts,p.57

http://veravratusaesociology.wikispaces.com/biblio.html

 

PARTICIPATORY RESEARCH AND OBSTACLES TO ITS IMPLEMENTATION IN FORMER "REAL -SOCIALIST"  SOCIETIES

- nine theses on the privatization, participation and participatory research

 

1.     Preference for the specific form of social ownership relations and corresponding regulation mechanism of  participation in the distribution of material wealth, power and esteem, is conditioned by interests of large social groups to maintain or to change their place and role in social division of labor. Educated representatives of particular fractions of main social groups articulate these interests in the form of different, often confronted legitimization ideologies.

        This thesis I will illustrate on the example of Socialist Federative Republic Yugoslavia.

        Participation of workers and other employed in the decision making at the work place became one of the central ideas of the dominant legitimization ideology in former Yugoslavia after the conflict of Yugoslav communist leadership headed by Tito, with Soviet and Inform bureau communist leadership headed by Stalin in 1948. Important element of the conflict were confronted conceptions how should be organized domestic and international economic relations in the “socialist community”. In the years following the enactment of the 1950 “Basic law on the management of state economic enterprises and higher economic associations by the work collectives”, ensued several constitutional expansions of the domain of “working people's and citizens’ decision-making from the enterprise level to the educational, cultural, scientific, health and social care institutions and territorially defined socio-political communities. Such mainly normative development stimulated the hope even in developed capitalist countries in the possibility of “socialism with the human face”. 

        Self-management discourse that invoked further democratization and decentralization of the decision-making process, however, from the end of fifties became ever more intensively and openly used as instrument for the transformation of the renewed idea of independent nation states’ building into the new legitimization ideology, preparing thus internal spiritual and judicial ground for the violent destruction of multi-ethnic and multi- confessional federal state  External conditions were created by interests of big powers in post Berlin wall fall uni-polar world, that did not need and want any more to tolerate even the semblance of alternative, self-managing model of social relations’ organization (Vratusa-Zunjic, V., 1996: “The Intrinsic Connection Between Endogenous and Exogenous Factors of Social (dis)Integration - a Sketch of Yugoslav Case”, Dialogue, Paris, No.22 and No.23, 1997, 7-25 and 3-37)

 

2.     Main local social bearer of the abandonment of self-managing and participation rhetoric and of the propagation of the re-privatization process concerning the formerly nationalized and afterwards socialized private property of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia’s bourgeoisie, is one part of the former class of the collective owners of the main production means. These were the most entrepreneurial members of the party/state “bureaucracy” and economic “technocracy” that openly began to search for the more safe form of self-reproduction in the privileged social positions in “their” federal units. They did not want any more to depend on the insecure mechanism of the ruling work functions’ maintenance through the nomination to the command positions in all spheres of society by the top of the central party-state bureaucracy (Vratusa-Zunjic, V., 1993: “Protagonists of Ownership Transformation in the Social Systems of Eastern, Central and Southeastern Europe with Special Attention to the case of Yugoslavia”, Sociologija (Sociology), 1, 53-68).

        Under the influence of the decades long experience of activity and attained privileges in the framework of hybrid plan-market self-managing economy, this social group is leaning towards neo-etatistic model of enlarged production regulation.

 

3.     Ever more significant local social bearers of the privatization process are becoming the old and new “small” entrepreneurs that transform themselves over the night into ever bigger capitalists in the conditions of war, inflation, gray economy and lawlessness. More direct engagement in varied economic activities and decades long experience in quasi-market operations, make this social group prone to neo-liberal model of social reproduction organization.

 

4.     In spite of the severe, sometimes even bloody mutual fight concerning the appropriation of control over former social and state property, former members of nomenclature class and new private entrepreneurs have also common interests. They cooperate in the business of half-legal and illegal privatization of social and state property through signing of harmful agreements, devaluation and direct theft of existing social and state capital. In this way are created conditions for as cheap as possible or even moneyless takeover of enterprises by the management, their relatives and political associates.

 

Common interest of these two social groups is also enactment of such laws on enterprises and on work relations that legalize quasi-dictatorial decision-making power of managers and owners, and this not only in economy, but in institutions of culture and education as well. These groups expect that in this way their control of unpaid surplus labor reproduction and appropriation would evolve more efficaciously.

 

 5.    Predominantly parasitic and compradore orientation of these social groups on quick profit and speculative/unproductive activities, prevents realization of proclaimed aim of privatization - restructuration of economy and increase in the performance efficacy. Extreme concentration of decision-making power, contrary to the intentions, leads in time to the drop in productivity. It provokes different forms of passive and active resistance to the execution of orders by those that are completely excluded from the process of key decision making.

 

6.     Direct producers are brutally struck by high rates of open and disguised unemployment in the conditions of war, blockade, double-digit drop in production and accompanying drop in living standard, but increase in the poverty diseases. Atomized, disorganized and divided along the qualification, income, gender, ethnic, regional, political and even trade union demarcation lines, they became easy pray for exploitation and domination from the side of the old and new power block. Having rather bad experiences concerning the inefficacy of only formal self-management in the past, they did not resist strongly enough to the abolishment of their earlier constitutional rights to use and management of social property and to participation in decision-making. Through the new legislature they are deprived not only of their at least formal self-management rights, but of the relative employment security as well. In the conditions of massive impoverishment, everyday fight for bare survival becomes the main preoccupation of the majority of both employed and unemployed, so that there rests little time for qualitatively higher demands for the participation in decision-making.

 

7.     When the threshold of frustration tolerance is over-stepped, however, complex economic, political, social and moral crisis can also stimulate the return of the demand for participation in decision-making to the very top of the political programs and actions of social movements and union organizations in former countries of real socialism. In the similar manner economic recession and fiscal crisis of the welfare state in the countries of real capitalism, stimulated a number of researchers and union activists to point out to the democratic participation of employed as to the main human right based in work and not in property, and therefore consider it to be the strategy of the trade union movement for the 21st century (Kester, G., Pinaud, H., (eds) 1995: Syndicats et participation democratique - Scenario 21, L’Harmattan, Paris, 56-71).  If the workers’ unions would not take initiative, there exists real danger that private employers and the state would take advantage of this to adopt the idea of participation to their own needs and to marginalize further the autonomous union  organization of the employed.

 

8.     Aiming at the promotion of realization of the strategy of increase in participation of employed and all citizens  in economic, political and social decision-making,  it is necessary to combine the action capacity of the trade unions and scientific capacity of the university in the participatory research. Social scientist as the possessors of "expert power" in the partnership relationship with the interested workers and other employed that posses little or no "material power", should carry out researches aimed at the re-distribution of the existing oligarchic decision-making relations. Partnership relation and "symmetrical communication" during the research should stimulate the transformation of the usual "research object" into the motivated "participating subject" also after the research.

        This is not to say that explicit dedication to the change of power relations that tends to blend the role of scientist and political activist does not pose any theoretical and practical problems. On the contrary, these problems should be taken into consideration with utmost care in every concrete situation. Participatory research can for instance rise hopes of workers to be able to take control of their own jobs. This hope can be brutally disappointed if the enterprise goes bankrupt. Employees might even blame researchers for the loss of their jobs and drop all interest in the idea of participation in decision making.

        Positivistic alternative to difficult participatory research engagement of university members does not present the expression of value neutrality, but the determination to put one's expertise in the service of the maintenance of the existing social power relations.

        Participatory research should include: a) the analysis of the law regulation in order to demand necessary changes with the aim of enlargement of the formal rights to participation in decision-making (thus should be avoided that newer versions of for example General collective agreement be worse from the old ones with respect to participation - the one published in Official Gazette RS No. 34/94 included entire paragraph VIII on "Participation of workers in decision-making", that was completely omitted form the one published in 1997); b) explorative research of attitudes toward the desirable organization of relations within the enterprise, local community and the society at large; c) explanative researches of factors that enhance or block the development of democratic participation in decision-making in different life spheres (until now there exists the greatest number of studies relating to the impact of different privatization models on the efficacy of the enterprise performance - there is enough evidence to suggest that employee stockholding, participation in profit and decision making positively influence the productivity and loyalty to the enterprise, but little is known on the satisfaction of employees; d) making of studies of characteristic cases of economically successful and unsuccessful enterprises, that should be put into the longitudinal and comparative perspective.

 

9.     The main obstacle to implementation of so conceived participatory research in former European real existing socialist societies and in former real existing self-managing Yugoslavia is found in actual absence of "material power:" social bearers that would be willing and able to order and finance such participatory research, and even less to apply its results in the transformation of the existing social power relations. Another obstacle is inherent to the capitalist mode of production - redistribution of participation in social power is limited by imperatives of the maintenance of the optimal profit rate.